Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
2087047
BACR~RO~ND OF TT~ Il~ENTION
This invention relates to a method f or heat
treating a bread baking wheat flour to form a flour and
the resulting dough having; ~ uvtd stability and bake
absorption .
Various approaches have been proposed in the
prior art for heat treating wheat flour in order to
alter its characteristics. For example, ~ankinson U.S.
Patent No . 3, 554, 772 discloses a heat treatment method
designed to inactivate a substantial portion of the
enzymes of the flour. In this method flour is heated
in an aqueous suspension to about 135 to 150 F in the
presence of a hydration prevention agent, and the
heated suspension is then sprayed dried, preferably to
a moisture content below about 10 percent. The result-
ing heat treated flour i8 said to provide a dough with
a longer shelf life caused by the reduced enzyme
activity. A heating approach which requires the ~lour
to be f irst mixed with water and then sprayed dried i8
a relatively cumbersome, energy intensive process.
Fur~h~ -IL~:, there is no suggestion in the ~ nk; ncrm
patent that heat treating parameters may be selected to
2a87~47
-- 2
increase dough strength and bake absorption of the
dough formed from the heat treated flour.
Hampton U.S. Patent No. 3,869,558 discloses a
method for making a free-flowing cereal flour with a
moisture content between about ~ and about 10 percent
and a high and stable viscosity. The flour is made by
subjecting a cereal flour with a normal native moisture
content to indirect heating at a temperature of 12 0 to
160C for 5 to 60 minutes. The flour being treated is
~;ntA;nl~ under a protective blanket of water vapor
derived from the vaporization of the native moisture of
the flour starting r~tPr;~l The disclosed method is
said to degrade alpha amylase present in the f lour to
produce a product with a high Falling Number and a high
water binding capacity. There is no suggestion in the
Hampton patent that a heat treatment process may be
designed to produce an; _ ~ved dough having increased
stability and increased bake absorption.
Dough strength or stability is a measure of a
flour's tolerance to mixing, and it is related to the
gluten properties of the flour. Higher stability
flours often command a higher price, and it would be
therefore desirable if it were possible to enhance the
dough strength of a f lour.
SUMM~RY OF T~T~ T~V3NTION
It is a primary obj ect of this invention to
provide a flour or bread dough with increased
farinograph stability. It is another ob~ect to provide
a f lour or bread dough with increased bake absorption .
It is another object to provide a flour or bread dough
with the af orementioned properties along with decreased
enzyme activity. It is another object of this
invention to provide a bread dough with increased
refrigerated and/or frozen shelf life.
-- 2
2087~47
-- 3
According to a f irst aspect of this
invention, a method ig provided for increasing
stability of bread baking wheat flour by suspending the
flour in a heated carrier gas having an outlet
temperature in the range of about 70 to 145C for a
time sufficient to reduce moisture content of the flour
by at least 5 weight percent and to increase
farinograph stability of the flour by at least 10
percent, and then separating the flour from the carrier
gas to provide a f ree- f lowing dry powder having a
reduced moisture content and an increased far; nr~r~r~
stability is compared with the initial flour. The heat
treated flour can be mixed with dough forming
ingredients ;nclllfl;n~ water to form an increased
stability dough.
According to a second aspect of this
invention, a method is provided for increasing the net
bake absorption of bread baking wheat f lour by
suspending the f lour in a heated carrier gas having an
outlet temperature in the range of about 70 to 145 C
for a time sufficient to reduce moisture content of the
flour by at least 5 weight percent and to increase net
bake absorption of the f lour by at least 2 lbs . of
water per 100 lbs. flour. The flour is then separated
from the carrier gas to provide a free-flowing dry
powder having a reduced moisture content and an
increased net bake absorption as cQmpared with the
initial flour. This heat treated flour can be mixed
with dough forming ingredients ;n~ll1fllng water to form
an increased net bake absorption bread dough.
As described in detail below, the preferred
: ' Qfl; t~ of thi~ invention provide a heat treated
bread baking wheat flour with an increased stability,
an increased water absorption along with a reduced
enzyme activity as compared with the original f lour.
This invention is particularly useful in increasing
-- 3
2087~7
. ~
-- 4
gluten strength of relatively low stability flours.
The heat treated f lour described below has an increased
shelf stability and a reduced moisture content. The
reduced moisture content of the flour reduces shipping
costs associated with flour ~r~n~pnrt and the increased
atability of the flour reduces the amount of vital
gluten that must be added in applications such as high
f iber breads . me higher net bake absorption of the
flour reduces the amount of flour needed to make a
standard loaf.
BRIEF DR~TPTION OF T~R DRAWTN~C
Figure 1 is a block diagram of a drying
apparatus suitable for use with the preferred
embodiment of the method of this invention.
Figures 2 and 3 are farinograms for Control 2
and Bxample 5 of Table 2, respectively.
Figures 4 and 5 are farinograms for Control 4
and Example 10 of Table 4, respectively.
Figure 6 is a graph of data related to
Controls 2, 10 and 11 and Examples 4-6, 20, 22 and 23.
DETAI~ED DESCRIPTION OF THE
; ISN'~ y pREFR~Rn ENI~ODIMRNTS
The following paragraphs define standard
terms used in this specification and the following
claima, and then provide a description of the presently
preferred embo~l; c of this invention and a number of
specif ic examples .
Def; n; tinncl
Bread dough -- A dough for making bread,
;nrlll~1;ng breads guch as white, whole wheat and other
breads and related products such as pizza crust,
whether frozen, refrigerated at temperaturea above
f reezi~g, or unref rigerated .
-- 4
20870~7
.
-- 5
Bread baking f lour - - A f lour suitable f or
baking bread, including bread such as white, whole
wheat and other breads and related products such as
pizza crust.
Ref rigerated dough - - A dough which is stored
at a reduced temperature to enhance shelf life,
;nrl~-rl;ng reduced temperatures above and below
f reezing .
Wheat f lour - - A f lour milled f rom any wheat,
;nrlll~;nrj hard, soft and durum wheats.
Moisture content -- Moisture content of a
flour as measured by the air-oven method set out in
AACC method 44-16 (revised 10/27/82).
Ash content -- Ash content of a flour as
measured by the basic method set out in AACC method 08-
01 (revised 10/28/81).
Protein content - - Protein content of a f lour
as measured by the ; ~ .,v~d Rj eldahl method set out in
AACC Method 46-10 (revised 9/25/85).
Farinograph stability -- Dough strength as
measured by the farinograph method set out in AACC
Method 54-21 (reviewed 10/27/82). Stability is a
measure of a flour' 8 tolerance to mixing, and it is
further discussed in the F~rino~:aph ~andbook, Burt L.
D'Appolonia and Wallace H. Runerth, Editors (Third
Edition, 1984, American Association of Cereal Chemists,
St. Paul, Minnesota).
Palling Number -- Alpha amylase activity as
measured by the method set out in AACC Method 56-81B
(revised 10/12/88).
Bake absorption -- A measure of the amount of
water that can be added to a f lour to f orm a dough
having good sheeting properties (expressed in weight
percent of water per unit weight of flour) as set out
in AACC Method 10-11 (revised 10/27/82).
-- 5
2087~7
- 6 -
Net bake absorption -- E~ake absorption as
def ined above minus the amount of water resiuired to
raise the moisture content of a flour to a standard
moisture content. The net bake absorption can be used
to compare water binding properties of f lours having
differing initial moisture rnntPntç~.
General D; ~cus8ion
This invention is based on the discovery that
by properly selecting heating conditions and time
parameters the stability and net bake absorption of a
flour can be increased by a dry heating process. The
dry heating process described below utilizes short
times and carefully controlled temperatures such that
enzymes such as alpha amylase are partially or
substAnt;Ally inactivated, while gluten strength and
bake absorption are actually increased.
In the preferred embodiment of this invention
a bread baking wheat f lour is treated with a drying
apparatus as shown in the attached f igure . This drying
apparatus 10 includes a heat exchanger 12 which is
rnnn~rt,oc9 to a dryer column 14. Fans 16 force a
carrier gas such as air or other oxygen cnntA;n;ng gas
through the dryer column 14. Any a~Lu~Liate heat
source can be used to heat the carrier gas as it passes
through the heat exchanger 12, ;nr~ ;n~ gas fired
heaters and steam heaters. The heat exchanger 12 can
also operate with electric heating or can utilize
heated waste ga8es f rom other processes .
The dryer column 14 i8 designed to f it the
particular application, having a diameter determined
in the convPnt; nnAl manner by factors such as the
evaporative duty, the drying temperature and the
velocity rerluired to convey the material. The length
of the column is determined by conv~ntlnnAl factors to
provide the required residence time. Depending upon
-- 6 --
2~87347
.
-- 7
the application the dryer colum.n 14 can be shaped and
sized to f it within an existing building or to provide
the f; n; ~hed product at a required position.
Preferably, the fans 16 include conventional control
dampers (not shown~ to set the air volume and pressure
balance at the feed point. When the overall system
pressure drop is not high a simple single fan system
can be employed. A feeder 18 feeds the ;nrnm;ng flour
into the dryer column 14 at a feed point 20. A variety
of $eeders can be used 1nrlllfl;ng vibrating, paddle, or
pneumatic type feeders. I~oppers with a~ru~Liate
discharging facilities can be provided for cnnt;nl~ous
metering from batch chargers. Convpn~;nnAllyl high air
velocities are employed at the feed point 20 to assist
in product entrainment and dispersion. I,ower
velocities are preferably used in the subse~auent dryer
column 14 to achieve an increased residence time.
The feeder 18 introduces flour into the dryer
column 14, and the f lour is carried by the moving
heated air to a recycle separator 22. If desired, the
flour passing out the bottom of the recycle sPrArAtnr
22 can be reintroduced into the feeder 18 to repeat the
drying process. Generally this is not done and the
entrained f lour is separated f rom the carrier gas by a
main separator 24. This treated powder is a free-
flowing dry product which i8 available at the discharge
point 26 for collection or bagging. If desired, the
treated flour may be cooled at the discharge point 26
to ambient temperature prior to rnl l ertinn or bagging.
A suitable drying apparatus 10 can be
obtained from APV Pasilac ~imited of Carlisle, Cumbria,
United ~tingdom ;flpnt;fied as a TV drying system. In
the f ollowing examples, such a system was arranged to
r-;n~A;n the flour in the heated air for a rP~;flPnrP
time of 5 to 8 seconds, and to provide an inlet air
temperature measured upstream of the fPeflro;nt 20 in
-- 7
2~87047
- 8 -
the range of 150-255C and an outlet or exhaust air
temperature measured upstream of the recycle separator
22 in the range of 70-145C. As discussed below, these
conditions have been found to provide a flour with
surprisingly increased farinograph stability and net
bake absorption. The exhaust air t ~ tl-re i8
pref erably 70 -145 C, more pref erably 8 0 -12 0 C, and
most preferably 90-110C.
Farinograph stability is a well known measure
of dough strength, which involves forming a dough by
mixing flour and water, and then graphing the
resistance of the dough to mixing as a function of
elapsed time. Conditions are standardized so that
maximum resistance is centered at a level e~ual to 500
Brabender Units (BU), and the elapsed time is measured
between the point where the top of the curve first
reaches the 500 BU line (arrival time) and the point
where the top of the curve leaves the 500 BU line
(departure time). This elapsed time is the farinograph
stability. In general, the greater the far;n~rilrh
stability, the greater the strength of the dough and
the greater its suitability for bread baking.
Figures 2-5 illustrate farinograms for two
controls and two examples discussed below. Figures 2
and 3 are copies of the f arinograms f or Control 2 and
Example 5 of Table 2, respectively; Figures 4 and 5 are
copies of farinograms for Control 4 and Example 10 of
Table 4, respectively. In each case the arrival and
departure times are marked with vertical arrows, and
the farinograph stability is listed. Note the
different curve shape and the increased stability of
the examples ( Figures 3 and 5 ) as compared with the
respective controls (Figures 2 and 4).
In general, the flour starts with a moisture
content in the range of 11 to 16 wt~, and moisture
content is reduced by at least 5 wt~ i~ the d ~ng
20~7047
. ~
g
apparatus 10, of ten to a value of less than 7 wt~ . The
flour is heated in the carrier gas preferably for a
time of less than one minute, more preferably for a
time of less than 30 seconds, and most preferably for a
time of less than 10 seconds (such as 5-8 seconds).
Stability Tests
In the following ~Y~mr~ 1-21, flour was
heat treated in a dryer as described above at various
inlet temperatures and at various outlet or exhaust
temperatures. In general, the inlet temperature was
controlled by adjusting the amount of heat supplied by
the heat exchanger 12 within the range of 128C to
255C. The eYhaust or outlet temperature was measured
with a thermocouple upstream of but near the recycle
separator 22 and was adjusted for various values
between 70C and 175C by controlling the product feed
rate to maintain the desired exhaust temperature. Air
was used as the carrier gas, though other gases such as
N2 and 2 are believed suitable. The flour was
sub; ected to elevated temperatures in the dryer column
14 for appr~Y;r~t~ly 5 to 8 seconds, and the
temperature of the heat treated flour as measured with
a t~Prr m~ter at the discharge point 26 was about 10C
less than the outlet t~ ture. Two different heat
sources were used, including natural gas and steam. In
both cases, the heat source was separated f rom the
flour from by the heat exchanger 12. Flour was heat
treated at the rate of 100 pounds per hour.
It is known that storing a flour over a long
period at low or room temperature will increase the
farinograph stability of the flour to a limited extent.
This effect was taken into account in the following
eYamples by starting with examples and controls f rom
the same batch of flour and performing the farinograph
g
2~87~7
- 10 -
tests on the same day f or both the heat treated f lours
and the respective control flours.
S~m~l eE~ 1- 3 (Table 1)
A high gluten 100 percent spring wheat flour
s~ ~sPnt 1 f; ~fl under the tradename Ryrol and produced in
the ~astings, ~innesota mill of ConAgra, Inc. was
divided into f our samples . The control sample was
untreated, and was analyzed as described in Table 1 at
the same time as the treated flours of Examples 1, 2
and 3. The flours of Examples 1, 2 and 3 are treated
with an inlet temperature of 150C and an exhaust
temperature as stated at the top of Table 1. In this
car~e, the heat exchanger 12 was heated by a natural gas
flame. The flour waEs subst~nt;~lly us~modified and was
not bleached, enriched or treated with enzymes or
bromate .
~L~
SAMPLE CONTROL 1 EX. 1 EX. 2 EX. 3
Snlet/Outlet Temp (C) NA 150/70- 150/80 150/90
Moisture ~wt%~ 13.7 6.3 5.6 4.5
Ash twtX~ .53 .53 .52 .52
Protein ~wt%~ 13.7 13.7 13.6 13.7
Falling Number (seconds~ 426 ~ 517
rul i,. ~,~"l.
Stabi~ity (minutes~ 15.2 16.5 16.0 23.0
Absorption (wt%~ 64.0 60.4 61.5 61.2
Peak Time (minutes~ 9.0 8.0 10.0 10.5
Mixing Tol~rance 15.0 25.0 25.0 15.0
(B.U. ~
A~justed to 149s moir~ture basi~
Table 1 lists the measured moisture, ash and
protein content of the flourr~. The moisture content
was subst~nt ~ y reduced ~or the treated flour o~
Examples 1, 2 and 3, and for this reason the ash,
- 10 -
2087~47
protein and Falling Number measurements have been
normalized for flour at a 14 percent moisture basis in
these and all subser"uent exampleE. Note that the ash
and protein rrlnt~nt~ have not varied, but that the
Falling Number has increased, due to inactivation of
alpha amylase.
Table 1 also shows the results of farinograph
measurements on the control flour and the flour of
Examples 1 through 3. As pointed out above, farino-
graph stability is an indication of the strength of the
dough and its resistance to damage by mixing. Note
that the farinograph stability of the flours of
Examples 1, 2 and 3 is increased as compared to the
control. As shown in Table 1, the alpha amylase
activity of the flour of Exhibit 3 was found to be
subst~nt;~l ly lower than the alpha amylase activity of = =
the control f lour .
Table 1 conf irms that the heat treatment
process described above increases the gluten strength
of the treated f lour as compared to the control f lour .
It should be noted that Examples 1 through 3 (and all
the l~ ;n~ng examples described below) tested positive
f or peroxidase . In view of the reduced alpha amylase
activity, it appears that the heat treatment described
above heats the f lour to a point where alpha amylase is
inactivated, but not the point where peroxidase is
inactivated .
Exam~les 4-6 (Table 2)
For Examples 4 through 6 a hard red spring
wheat similar but not identical to that described above
was divided into four samples. The control was not
heat treated and the r~m~;n;nrJ three samples were
treated as defined in Table 2 (Examples 4 through 6).
A natural gas heater was used for Examples 4 and 5, and
a steam heater was used for Example 6. As before the
- 11 -
2û8~047
1-
- 12 -
ash and protein content (when nm~ ; 7e~1 for a 14percent flour moisture content) were unchanged, while
the moisture content of the treated flour was
subst~nt; ~ l 1 y reduced. The Falling Nurr~er of the
treated f lours was increased as compared to the
control. Again, farinograph stability mealiur,
showed that the treated f lour of r ~1 PF~ 4, 5 and 6
exhibited increased dough stability as compared with
the control f lour .
~L~
SAMPLE CONTROL 2 EX. 4 EX. 5 EX. 6
Inlet/Out~et Temp ~C~ NA 150/90 165/110 1Z8/90-
Moisture ~wtX) 13.5 4.8 3.4 4.5
Ash ~wtX) .557 .563 .558 .576
Protein ~wtX) 13.4 13.5 13.4 13.3
Fal~ing Number ~seconds) 427 566 705 601
Farinogr~ph- -
Stability ~minutes) 13.0 19.5 Z9.5 17.0
Absorption ~wtX) 64.4 64.3 64.4 64.2
Peak Time ~minutes) 7.0 9.5 1Z.S 9.5
Mixing Toler~nce B.U. ZS.0 ZO.O Z0.0 Z0.0
AdjuE~ted to 14~ moi~ture basi2~.
Additionally, pH measurements showed that the
pH of the treated flour was not significantly different
from that of the control flour, and particle size
mea~uL- ~ indicated that the particle size distribu-
tion of the treated flour was not significantly differ-
ent f rom that of the control f lour .
,T~ rrll71 eg 7- 9 (Table 3 )
For Examples 7 through 9 a sample of pastry
flour (100 percent soft wheat) obtained from the Alton,
T11; n,l~ ~ mill of ConAgra, Inc . was divided into four
- 12 -
20870~7
- 13 -
~amples. This flour was not bleached, enriched or
supplemented with bromate or malt. The control sample
was not heat treated, but it was analyzed at the same
time as ~xamples 7, 8 and 9. These samples were heat
treated at the indicated inlet/outlet temperatures
using natural gas as a heat source. As before the
moisture content was subst~nti~l ly reduced, and the ash
and protein content when calculated at a moisture basis
of 14 percent were subst~nt~lly unchanged. As before,
the Falling NuTnber increased indicating reduced alpha
amylase activity. Farinograph stability mea,jur, t~
indicated that the stability of a bread dough formed
with the treated ~lour of 3xamples 7, 8 and 9 increased
with increasing exhaust temperature.
l~L~
SAMPLE CONTROL 3 EX. 7 EX. 8 EX. 9
Inlet/Outlet Temp ~C~ NA 150-/70- 150/80 150/9~
Moistur~ ~wtX) 13.4 5.9 4.1 3.3
A6h ~wt%) .35 .35 .36 .35
Protein ~wtX) 8.55 8.7 8.6 8.6
Falling Number ~seconds) 377 ~ - 444
r~
stDbility ~minutes) 5.5 11.5 14-0 16.0
Absorption (wtX) 51.6 49.7 48.3 48.9
Pe3k Time ~minuses) 1.5 5.5 6.0 8.0
Mixing To~rance B.U. 110.0 35 0 30.0 30.0
~djuated to 14~ rloi~ture b~sia.
T~ le 10 (Table 4)
A ~auantity of pastry flour similar but not
identical to that described above in connection with
Examples 7 through 9 was divided i~to two parts. The
control ~ample was not heat treated, while the other
~ample was heat treated as 3xample 10, using natural
- 13 -
2087~7
,,
- 14 -
gas as the heat source. As before the moisture content
was subst~nt;;ll ly reduced, the ash and protein content
were little changed when corrected to a moisture basis
of 14 percent, arLd the Falling NuTnber increased.
Far; nm ~r~r~ stability measurements showed a substantial
increase in dough stability, from 4 to 11 minutes. As
before, the particle size was not seen to change with
heat treatment.
TABLE 4
SAMPLE WNTROL 4 EX 10
In~et/Outlet Temp. ~oc) NA 150-/90
Moisture ~wtx) 11,9 3.3
Ash ~wtx) .466 .472
Protein ~wt%~ 9.6 9.3
Fnllin9 Number ~seconds) 462 574
r~
StabiLity ~minutes) 4.0 11.0
Absorption ~wt%) s1 o so 7
Pe~k Time ~minutes) 1.5 6.5
Mixin3 Toler~nce ~s.u.~ 120.0 35.0
Corrected to 14~ moi~ture b
Exa~Lples 11-13 (Table 5)
A quantity of bread flour (100 percent hard
red winter wheat) obtained from the Alton, Tll;~o~
flour mill of ConAgra, Inc. was divided into four
sa~rLples. The control sample was not heat treated,
while the L~ ; n; n~ samples were heat treated as
def ined in connection with ExaLmples 11, 12 and 13 of
Table 5. In all cases natural gas was used for the
heat source. Moisture, ash and protein content, and
Falling ~umber followed the patterns described above.
Additionally, farinograph stability measurements showed
- 14 -
2087047
- 15 -
a substantial increase in dough strength, particularly
f or Example 13 .
The flour used in these samples was not
hl 1~ rh~rl or ~nr; ~hf~l, and neither malt nor bromate was
added .
TABLE S
SAMPLE CONTROL 5 EX. 11 EX. lZ EX. 13
Inlet/OutLet Temp. (C) NA ~150/70~ ~150/80) ~150/90)
Moisture ~wt%) 13.6 6.5 5.4 4.5
Ash ~wtX) .46 .47 .47 .46
Protein ~wtX) 11.7 11.8 11.7 11.7
Falling Number ~seconds) 477 ~ -- 58Z
Farinogrrlph -
Stebi~ity ~minutes) 11.5 16.0 16.0 Z5.0
Absorption ~wtx~) 61.6 62.4 6Z.Z 6Z.6
Peak Time (minutes) 7.0 8.5 8.5 9.0
Mixing To~erance (E.U.) 30.0 Z0.0 Z0.0 15.0
Corrected to 14~ moi~ture l:)asia
R~r~nl e 14 (Table 6)
Another quantity of bread flour similar but
not identical to that used f or Examples 12 and 13 was
divided into two parts, a control and the part used for
Example 14. The control was not heat treated, while
Example 14 was treated at an inlet temperature of 150C
and an outlet t~, ?r~tllre of 90C, using natural gas as
the heat source. Again, far;nr~r~r11 stability
mea~dUL~ tr~ showed an increase in stability for
Example 14 as compared with the control. In this case
the increase in stability was less than that measured
in Example 13. This is believed to be related to the
high stability of Control 6. The heat treatment
process described above is gerlerally more effective at
- 15 -
_ _ _ .... ... . .. . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ .
2~87~7
.
- 16 -
increasing farinograph stability of lower stability
flours than of higher stability flours.
~L~
SAMPLE CONTROL 6 EX. 14
Inlet/OutLet Temp. t-C~ NA 150/90-
Moisture (wt%) 13.Z 4.4
Ash ~wt%~ .446 .46a
Protein ~wtX) 11.3 11.5
Falling Number (se~onds) s4a 853
Farinosraph- -
Stabi~ity (min~tes) 43.0 45.0
Absorption (%) 57.5 58.5
Peak Time (min~tes) 14.0 17.0
Mixins To~eranre (B.U.) 15.0 15.0
Corrected to 1~% moi~ture ~ailr
r l e 15 ~Table 7 )
For Example 15 a ~uantity of durum extra
fancy flour (100 percent durum wheat obtained from the
Hastings, Minnesota mill of ConAgra, Inc. ) was divided
into two Eamples. The control sample was not heat
treated, while the other sample was heat treated as
defined in Table 7 for Example 15 at an inlet tempera-
ture of 150C an~ an outlet temperature of 90C using
natural gas as the heat source. The stability as
measured with a farinograph increased subst~nt;~l ly for
Example 15 as compared with the control . As bef ore the
ash and protein content Ll ;n~d 8Ub8t~nt;iilly constant
and the Falling Number increased on a 14 percent
moisture basis.
- 16 -
2~87~47
- 17 -
IL~L~
SAMPLE CONTROL 7 EX. 15
InLet/outlet Temp ~C) UA 150-/90
Moisture twt%) 13 4 5-5
Ash twt%) .678 .664
Protein twt%) 12.8 12.7
Falling Nur~er tseconds) 529 664
Stability tminutes) 3.0 6.0
Absorption twt%) 70.0 68.8
Peak T~me tminutes) 3.0 4.0
Mixina Tolerance tB.U.) 85.0 35.0
Corrected to 14~ moi~ture basi~
Exam~les 16-18 (Table 8)
Flour similar but not identical to that used
in that Example 15 was used for Examples 16 through 18.
A sample o~ this f lour was divided into f our parts, and
the control was not heat treated. Examples 16, 17 and
18 were heat treated at an inlet temperature of 150C
and outlet temperatures of 70, 80 and 90C,
respectively, using natural gaE as the heat source
(Table 8 ) . The moisture ash and protein content
~ollowed the pattern described above. Farinograph
stability measurements were not obtained for the
control, but they showed an increasing stability with
increasing exhaust gas temperature for Examples 16, 17
and 18.
- 17 -
2~8~0~7
.
- 18 -
~L~
SAMPLE: CONTROL B EX. 16 EX ~7 EX. 18
Inlet/Out~et Temp. tC) ~A 150-/70 150/80 150/90
Moisture ~wt%) 13.9 6.9 6.3 5.4
Ash (wtx) .69 .68 .68 .69
Protein ~wtx) 13.2 13.0 13.Z 13.2
Farino9r~ph--
Stnbility ~minutcs) 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0
Absorption ~wt%) 69.Z 69.0 69.5 68.3
Mixing To~erimce ~B.U.) 80.0 80.0 80.0 60.0
orr~cted to 14X moisture basis
EXAMPhB 19 (Table 9 )
For Example 19 a sample of f ine whole wheat
flour (100 percent spring wheat flour obtained from the
Xastings, Minnesota mill of ConAgra, Inc. ) was divided
into two parts. The first part formed the control of
Table 9, and the E~econd part was heat treated using
natural gas as the heat source with an inlet tempera-
ture of 150C and an outlet temperature of 90C . The
moiEIture, ash, and protein content and the Falling
NuTnber followed the pattern described above. Also,
farinograph E~tability measurements showed a
substAnt;Ally increased dough stability for Example 19
aE~ compared with the control. Particle size was
analyzed and found not to differ subEItAnti~l 1y between
the control and Example 19.
- 18 -
2~87~47
.
- 19 -
~L~
SANPLE CONTROL 9 EX. 19
Inlet/OutLet Temp. tC) RA 150/90-
Moisture (wtX~ 11.8 5.5
Ash (wt%~ 1.690 1.820
Protein (wt%~ 14.2 13.9
Falling Number (seconrs~ 511 571
Farinogrnph--
Stability (minutes~ 8.0 17.5
Absorption (wtX~ 70.0 70.2
Peak Time (minutes~ 5.5 6.5
Nixing Tolerance (B.U.~ 30.0 25.0
Corrected to 14rl moi~ture b~lriirJ
EX~MP~R~ 20-21 (Table 10)
For Examples 20 and 21 a high gluten, 100
percent spring wheat flour, identified under the
tradename E~yrol and produced in the Hastings, Minnesota
mill of ConAgra, ~nc., was divided into three samples.
The control sample was untreated and was analyzed as
described in Table 10 at the same time as the treated
flours of Examples 20 and 21. Example 20 was treated
with the drying apparatus 10, with an inlet temperature
of 255C and an exhaust temperature of 150C. Example
21 was treated with an inlet temperature of 300C and
an exhaust temperature o~ 175C. The heat source for
this trial was natural gas . The f lour was not
bl PA~-hPd, enriched or treated with enzymes or bromate.
Table 10 lists the measured moisture, ash and
protein content of the flours. The moisture content
was substAnt~Ally reduced for the treated flour of both
Examples 20 and 21, and for this reason the ash,
protein and Falling Number measurements have been
normalized for flour at a 14 percent moisture basis.
- 19 -
2~87047
- 20 -
Note that the ash and protein contents have not varied,
but that the Falling Number has increased, due to the
inactivation of alpha alylase. Table lO also shows the
results of farinograph measurements on the control
flour and the flours of r ,1 P~ 20 and 21. The
farinograph data shows that at the temperatures used in
this experiment the gluten tauality has been reduced.
This is noted in the stability analysis of Example 20.
Also note that at the t~ ,^r~t~lres used in Example 21 a
dough could not be produced which displayed any gluten
tauality .
Ttble 10
SAMPLE CONTROL 10 EX. 20 Et.
InLet/Outlet Temp. (C~ NA 255/150 300
13.2 1.0 0.6
tlIr~ t_tY1
.s3s .s6s .551
Ash ~wt%~
13.7 13.8 13.8
Protein (wtX~
420 600 1855
Fa~Lins Number ~seconds~
r~_ ~ h
stabiLity tminutes~ 11.0 1.5 Did not
yieLd -
Absorption twtX~ 63.s 78.9 cepabL~ of
prorJucintl a
P~ak Time ~minutes~ 6.0 26.0 curve.
Mixing Tolerance tB.U.~ 40 40
Corret ted to 14~f moi8ture baaiD
Examples 22-24 (T~h1 e lOa)
For Examples 22-24, a high gluten, lO096
spring wheat flour, identified under the trade name
Ryrol and produced in the ~Iastings, Minnesota mill o_
Con7~gra, Inc. (similar but not identical to the flour
of Examples 4-6, Control 2, Examples 20-21, and Control
lO ) was divided into f our samples . The control sample
- 20 -
2~7~47
-
- 21 -
was untreated and was analyzed as described i~ Table
lOa at the same time as the treated flours of Examples
22-24. Examples 22-24 were treated with the drying
apparatus 10, using inlet and outlet t~ ~-r~tllre8 a8
indicated in Table lOa . The f lour was not bleached,
enriched or treated with enzymes or bromate.
Table lOa lists the measured moisture, ash
and protein conter~t of the flours. The moisture
content was ~ubst~nt;~l ly reduced for the treated
flours o_ Examples 22-24, and for this reason the ash,
protein and Falling Number measurements have been
normalized for flour at a 14 perce~t moisture basis.
Note that the ash and protein ront~ont~ do not vary
sir,n;f;r~ntly, but that the Falling Number has
increased with respect to Control 11, due to the
inactivation of alpha amylase. Table lOa also shows
the results of farinograph meaffuLl 8 on the control
flour and the flours of Examples 22-24. The
farinograph data show that the gluten ~uality has been
increased in Examples 22 and 23, but reduced in Example
24. Also note that at the temperatures used in Example
24 a dough could not be produced which displayed any
gluten quality.
- 21 -
2~87047
.
- 22 -
TA~LE 10a
E-AMPLE CONTROL 11 EX. 22 EX. 23 EX. Z4
Inlet/Cutlet Temp (-C~ NA 22~O/125O Z35O/13so ZB5/165
Moisture (wtX) 12.1 2.3 1.9 0.6
Ash (wt%) .54B .560 .560 .594
Protein (wtX) 13.5 13.5 13.4 ~3.8
Fa~in3 Number (seconds) 410 457 549 913
r~ h
Stability (minutes) 13.0 47.0 43.0 Did not
Absorption (wt%) 63.9 63.8 65.6 yield ~
Peak Time (minutes) 6.5 33.5 33.0 producing a
Mixing To~erance 30 10 1~ curve.
~B.U.)
Corrected to 14~ moisture basir~
Figure 6 graphically presents data related to
Controls 2, 10 and 11 and Examples 4-6, 20, 22 and 23,
which were similar high gluten, 100~6 spring wheat
flours. Note that stability is increased with respect
to the average control value for outlet tF~rnr~=ratllres of
90, 110, 125 and 135C, but that stability is much
lower for an outlet temperature of 150C than 135C.
Based on the data of Figure 6, it appears that outlet
temperatures up to about 145C provide increased
stability flours for this type of flour.
Bake Tests
Bake tests were perf ormed to compare the net
bake absorption of flours treated with the drying
apparatus 10 with control flours. A high gluten, 100
percent hard red spring wheat f lour sold under the
tr~fli ~ ~ ~yrol and produced in the Hastings, Minnesota
mill of Con~gra, Inc. was used for these tests. This
flour was a fraction of the control and the flour of
Example 5 of Table 2 above. The control was not heat
treated. The heat treated sample was heat treated with
the drying apparatus 10, with the inlet and outlet
- 22 -
20g7~47
- 23 -
temperatures ad~usted at 165 C and 110 C,
respectively, and a rP~irlPnre time in the range of 5 - 8
seconds .
The control and treated f lours were used to
form sponges using the recipe set out in Table lla.
TDRT.T~ lla
SPO~GE GR~MS
Std ~ard Wheat Bread Flour (ConAgra, Inc . ) 435 . 00
Vital Wheat Gluten (ConP~grA, InC.) 90.00
Yeast Food (Fer~aloid, ADM Ark~dy) 3.75
Dough Conditioner (SS~, ADM Arkady) 3.75
Dough Conditioner ~El~sdo, ADM Ark~dy) 5.63
~ . eD~ed Baker's Yeast (Red Star) 22.50
'rap Water 390.00
The f ollowing method was used to f orm the
sponges:
All of the ingredients of Table llA were
mixed in a Hobart Model A-120 Mixer using a three-prong
mixer for one minute on low speed, followed by one
minute on medium speed. The resulting sponge was then
placed in a greased dough trough, in a fermentation
cabinet (TMCO Mfg. Co. FP~nt~i on Cabinet) for three
hours at 86F and 8296 relative humidity.
These sponges were then used to f orm loaves,
using the recipe set out in Table llb.
20870~7
- 24 -
T~P.T.R 1 1 h
~~a~i
Hard Wheat Bread Flour (ConAgra, Inc . ) 225 . 00
Oat Fiber (Snowite, Canadi~n Harvest) 150 . 00
Salt (Omaha Bakers) 16 . 88
Sweet Dairy Whey (Fe~ster Foods) 11.25
Calcium Propionate (DuCo~) 3.75
Ticaloid Gum (Tic Lite, Tic Gums, Inc.) 2.81
Dough ~'nnr ~t;nn-~r (Panadan 123, Grin~te~d) 3.75
High Fructo~e Corn Syrup (~-r;n~lt~ ) 112.50
Tap WPter (100~ ABS) 360.00
The f ollowing method was used to f orm the
loaves:
The sponges and ingredients of Table llb were
mixed in a Hobart Model A-120 mixer using a three prong
mixer for one minute on low speed and five minutes on
medium speed. The resulting mixture was held for 35
minutes at 86F and 82% relative humidity in a
fermentation cabinet (TMCO Mfg. FPrr^nt~t;nn Cabinet).
The resulting material was weighed and cut into doughs
of 540g. These doughs were allowed to rest (covered)
for six minutes on a bench. The doughs were then
molded and panned, and the panned doughs were placed in
a proof box at 100F dry bulb t _- tl~re-110F wet
bulb temperature (TMCO Mfg. F, ~atlon Cabinet) until
the doughs ~tt~;nP(l a height of 3/4 inch over the top
of the pan. The proofed doughs were then baked for 18
minutes at 400F (TMCO Mfg. Reel Oven Model 16-32SS).
Table 12 sets out the results of the bake
tests. Net bake absorption defines the maximum amount
of water that can be added to the flour (ad~usted to a
standard moisture content flour) before the dough
becomes too sticky or wet to handle with a conventional
mixer .
- 24 -
2087047
.
- 25 -
I'AB~i3 12
BAKE RESULTS Xet Bake Mix time Dough Volume Bake
Sample A~8. (WtS) (minute~) Comment (cc) Score
Kyrol - Control
(V.W.G. ~a%) 100 8 Good 2525 87
Kyrol - Control
(V.W.G. ~4~) 96 6 Good 2550 83
Kyrol - Treated
(V.W.G. ~8S) 114 9 Good+ 2572 86
Kyrol -Treated
(V.W.G. ~4S) 116 5 Good+ 2500 88
Kyrol - Treated
(V.W.G. 6D2S) 107 6 Good+ 2525 89
Bake Standard
(V.W.G. ~12~) 102 6 Good 2450 90
Net bake absorption is expressed in Table 12
as the weight of water added to the flour as a
percentage of the c ' ;n~1 flour and vital wheat
gluten, corrected to a 14 wt9~ moisture content for the
f lour .
The Bake Score i~ an overall rating of each
individual loaf of bread as compared with a bake
standard (that is pr~ f;n~cl as having a bake score of
90) .
Note that the control flour was scored at 87
with 896 vital wheat gluten but only at 83 with 496 vital
wheat gluten. A bake score of 83 is generally
considered unsatisfactory. In contrast, the bake score
f or the treated f lour increa3ed with decreasing amounts
of vital wheat gluten. The treated flour with 296 added
vital wheat gluten had a bake 3core of 89, c~mr~r~hl e
to the bake score of 90 of the bake standard with 1296
added vital wheat gluten. ThiE; represents a cost
advantage, as the cost of vital wheat gluten is
significantly higher than that of flour. The increased
net bake absorption exhibited by the heat treated
flours represents a further c03t advantage.
- 25 -
2~870~
- 26 -
A second bake test was performed using the
control and heat treated f lours of the preceding bake
test to bake Kaiser rolls. A third flour was also
used, which was similar to the control flour with added
malted barley flour and bromate. The results of this
second bake test are set out in Table 13.
TA~3IE 13
~et Bake ~ix Time Dough Ai~ter 3ake Bake
Sample AbE~ (Wt~) (min) Comment Volume (cc) Score
Untreated Kyrol 54 3 - 12 Strong++ 350 87
( Control ~
Treated Ryrol 74 3 - 13 Good 287.5 87
Kyrol Std. 54 3 - 4 Good 445 90
Yalted & Bromate
As shown in Table 13, the net bake absorption
of the heat treated flour was 1096 greater than that of
the control f lour af ter accounting f or dif f erences in
moisture content of the heat treated and control
flours. The heat treated flour and the control flour
both showed longer mix times and lower volumes as
compared to the third f lour . These dif f erences are due
to the lack of malted barley f lour and bromate in the
heat treated and control flours.
A third bake test was performed to test the
effect of added malted barley flour and bromate.
Samples of the control and heat treated f lours of the
preceding bake test were modified by adding malted
barley f lour and bromate as additives, and these
modified flours were used to make Kaiser rolls as in
the preceding bake test. Table 14 sets out the
results .
- 26 -
2~87~47
- 27 -
~et Bake Nix Time Dough Bake
S~le Ab~ (Nt9~) (min) Comment Volume ~c) S~ore
Untreated ~Cytrol 54 3 - 6 Good 425 88
( Control ) + Nal t
+ Bromate
Treated ~Cyrol + 74 3 - 9 Good 400 88
Nalt + Bromate
As expected, the bake volume increased and
the mix time decreased as compared with comparable
measurements of Table 13. In forming the Raiser rolls,
the dough was scaled at 70g/roll. Starting with an
initial flour weight of lOOOg, the control flour of
Table 14 produced 23 Raiser rolls and 50g of scrap
dough, while the heat treated flour of Table 14
produced 26 Raiser rolls and 50g of scrap dough. The
increased net bake absorption of the heat treated f lour
increased the yield of rolls obtained from a given
weight of f lour .
Refrigerated I~ouqh R~k~ Tests
Bake tests were performed to test the shelf
life o~ refrigerated doughs made with heat treated
flours as compared with control flours. Table 15
defines the procedure used in these tests to make pizza
shells (Steps 1-5), store at 45F for six days (Step 6)
and then bake them (Step 7).
- 27 -
2~g7047
.
- 28 -
TAB~E 1~
Pizza (Harld Stretch)
Ingredient Amount
Flour 200 g.
Oil 4 cc
S~lt 4 g.
Sugar (Gr~n~ 4 g.
Yeaat (Comp) 6 g.
Water (Variable) 120 cc
1. Add oil to flour in mixer - mix for three minutea ~or even
di DLu~ .
2. Add salt ~md sugar to flour, oil mixture.
. Diaaolve yeaùt in warm water (105F), add to above dry
mixture .
4. ITix ~or three minutes low speed Hobart 11Odel N50 to form a
dough .
5. Shape and stretch doughs evenly with hands on a lightly
greased 12 " pizza pan .
6. I~afr;s~rilte 6 d y8 61 45CF.
7. Bake at 400F for 20 minutes.
Seven flour saTtLples were tested, ide~Ltified
as SaLTLples 1- 7 in Table 16 .
TABLE 16
~est Treatrlent Dou~h Comment~ After
Conditions ~inlet/ ~Wed water step 4 tshDpe &
Sample Flour Type outlet temp ~C~) Additives ~cc~ str~tch~
Kyrol ~hard red N/A .1% rlalted 1O0 d
spring wheat barLey flour Goo
2Kyrol ~hard red U/A --- 180 Good
sprinS ~wheat)
3Kyrol thard red 150/90 --- Z00 Good, Stron
spr i ng wheat )
4Succaneer ~hard 150/90 --- 195 Good, Strong
red wlnter wheat)
5Buccaneer thard N/A ~' 180
red winter wheat) Good
6Pastry Flour U/A --- 150 Cood
7P~stry Flour 150/90 --- 170 Good, Dry
- 28 -
2~87~7
.
- 29 -
The seven samples were then tested for dough
properties af ter the ref rigerated storage Step 5, with
the following results (Table 17).
TZ~RT.~ ~L7
Salr~le Douqh ~ tc,
Very sticky, loose, tacky, stringy surface
2 Sticky, slightly tacky, stringy surface
3 Not sticky, smooth surface
4 Not sticky, smooth surface
Sticky, stringy surface, tacky
6 Very very Eticky and loose, ran over pan,
unable to bake
7 Smooth surface, dry, not sticky
Note that the heat treated flours (Samples 3, 4 and 7)
were rated as superior to the respective controls
(Samples 2, 5 and 6). The samples were then baked
without toppings (Step 7) and the baked crusts were
described as set out in Table 18:
'rl~TiT.T~' 18
SamE~le ~ t r ~
Uneven surface, large bubbles, open
texture, bare spots - pan shows,
sticks to pan
2 Uneven surface, large bubbles, open
texture, sticks to pan
3 Smooth even surface, good i~ternal
texture, does not stick to pan
4 smooth even surface, good internal
texture, does not stick to pan
Uneven surface, sticks to pan
6 could not bake
7 Smooth surface, tight ;nt~rn~l texture
Light crust color, did not stick to pan
Table 18 ~nfi~ that the heat treated
flours produced pizza dough with an increased
refrigerated shelf life as compared with the control
f l ours .
The foregoing examples illustrate the manner
in which flour may be heat treated in accordance with
this invention to increase farinograph stability, net
- 29 -
2~87047
- 30 -
bake absorption, and refrigerated shelf life of dough
made from the heat treated flour. This invention
allows low protein - low strength hard wheat flours,
and even some sof t wheat f lours, to be used in bread
baking, and it increases the baking yield.
The examples set out above are ~ nt~n~9 ~d to
illustrate but not to limit the scope of this
invention, which is defined by the following claims,
including all equivalents.
- 30 -
